A soil toxicity test using the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans and an effective method of recovery

  • Steven G. Donkin
  • David B. Dusenbery


A new method for recovering nematodes from soils in an efficient, reproducible, and non-destructive manner has been developed. It was used to conduct short-term soil toxicity tests using the soil-dwelling nematode Caenorhabditis elegans and several different soil types spiked with copper chloride. The recovery method, which involves centrifugation through a colloidal silica suspension, allows the nematodes to be extracted from the soil matrix so that lethality can be assessed. The nematodes are unharmed by the recovery procedure, and both live and dead individuals are recovered with high efficiency (well over 80%), allowing reproducible concentration-response curves to be made after a 24-h exposure. The LC50s for copper were increased about tenfold by the presence of soil, and different soils had significantly different effects on toxicity. Toxicity of copper ion was also influenced by the concentration of sodium chloride and potassium chloride in the test solution, and the presence of bacteria increased the toxicity of copper ion in some soils. The LC50s in soil were close to the LC50 for the 2-week earthworm soil toxicity test, suggesting that a 24-h nematode toxicity test may be comparable to the 2-week earthworm test in terms of sensitivity.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Andrews PA, Nicholas WL (1976) Effect of bacteria on dispersal of Caenorhabditis elegans (Rhabditidae). Nematologica 22:451–461Google Scholar
  2. Brenner SJ (1974) The genetics of Caenorhabditis elegans. Genetics 77:71–94Google Scholar
  3. Callahan CA, Menzie CA, Burmaster DE, Wilborn DC, Ernst T (1991) On-site methods for assessing chemical impact on the soil environment using earthworms: A case study at the Baird and McGuire superfund site, Holbrook, Massachusetts. Environ Toxicol Chem 10:817–826Google Scholar
  4. Cox GN, Kusch M, Edgar RS (1981) Cuticle of Caenorhabditis elegans: Its isolation and partial characterization. J Cell Biol 90:7–17Google Scholar
  5. Dowd RM (1984) Biological monitoring. Environ Sci Technol 18:215AGoogle Scholar
  6. Finney DJ (1971) Probit analysis, 3rd ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 50–80Google Scholar
  7. Freckman DW, Mankau R, Ferris H (1975) Nematode community structure in desert soils: Nematode recovery. J Nematol 7:343–346Google Scholar
  8. Fried M, Broeshart H (1967) The soil-plant system. Academic Press, NY, p 19Google Scholar
  9. Giesy JP, Hoke RA (1989) Freshwater sediment toxicity bioassessment: Rationale for species selection and test design. J Great Lakes Res 15:539–569Google Scholar
  10. Greene JC, Bartels CL, Warren-Hicks WJ, Parkhurst BR, Linder GL, Peterson SA, Miller WE (1989) Protocols for short-term toxicity screening of hazardous waste sites, EPA 600/3-88/029. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Corvallis, ORGoogle Scholar
  11. Kim K (1989) Studies on interrill erosion of soils from the southeastern U.S. PhD thesis. University of Georgia, AthensGoogle Scholar
  12. Lew K, Chritton S, Blumberg P (1982) Biological responsiveness to phorbol ester and specific binding of (3H)phorbol 12, 13-dibutyrate in the nematode C. elegans, a manipulable genetic system. Terato Carcino Muta 2:19–30PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Loutit MW, Loutit JS, Brooks RR (1967) Differences in molybdenum uptake by microorganisms from the rhizosphere of Raphanus sativus L. grown in two soils of similar origin. Plant Soil 27: 335–346Google Scholar
  14. McLaren RG, Crawford DV (1973) Studies on soil copper. I. The fractionation of copper in soils. J Soil Sci 24:172–181Google Scholar
  15. Miller WP, Baharuddin MK (1986) Relationship of soil dispersibility to infiltration and erosion of southeastern soils. Soil Sci 142:235–240Google Scholar
  16. Miwa J, Tabuse Y, Furusawa M, Yamasaki H (1982) Tumor promotors specifically and reversibly disturb development and behavior of Caenorhabditis elegans. J Cancer Res Oncol 104:81–87Google Scholar
  17. Neuhauser EF, Loehr RC, Milligan DL, Malecki MR (1985) Toxicity of metals to the earthworm Eisenia fetida. Biol Fert Soils 1:149–152Google Scholar
  18. Niblack L, Hussey RS (1985) Extracting nematodes from soil and plant tissue. In: Zuckerman BM, Mai WF, Harrison MB (eds) Plant nematology laboratory manual. University of Massachusetts Agricultural Experiment Station, Amherst, pp 201–206Google Scholar
  19. Nicholas WL (1984) The biology of free-living nematodes, 2nd ed. Clarendon Press, Oxford, p 1Google Scholar
  20. Patrick FM, Loutit M (1976) Passage of metals in effluents, through bacteria to higher organisms. Water Res 10:333–335Google Scholar
  21. Popham JD, Webster JM (1979) Cadmium toxicity in the free-living nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Environ Res 20:183–191Google Scholar
  22. —, — (1982) Ultrastructural changes in Caenorhabditis elegans (Nematoda) caused by toxic levels of mercury and silver. Ecotoxicol Environ Safety 6:183–189Google Scholar
  23. Porcella DB (1983) Protocol for bioassessment of hazardous waste sites, EPA 600/2-83/054. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Corvallis, ORGoogle Scholar
  24. Slice LW, Freedman JH, Rubin CS (1990) Purification, characterization, and cDNA cloning of a novel metallothionein-like, cadmium-binding protein from Caenorhabditis elegans. J Biol Chem 265:256–263Google Scholar
  25. Sohlenius B (1980) Abundance, biomass and contribution to energy flow by soil nematodes in terrestrial ecosystems. Oikos 34:186–194Google Scholar
  26. Williams PL (1989) Evaluation of Caenorhabditis elegans as an acute lethality and a neurotoxicity screening model. PhD thesis. Georgia Institute of Technology, AtlantaGoogle Scholar
  27. Williams PL, Dusenbery DB (1987) Screening test for neurotoxins using Caenorhabditis elegans. In: Shahar A, Goldberg A (eds) Model systems in neurotoxicology: Alternative approaches to animal testing. Alan R Liss, NY pp 163–170Google Scholar
  28. —, — (1988) Using Caenorhabditis elegans to predict mammalian acute lethality to metallic salts. Toxicol Ind Health 4:469–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. —, — (1990a) Aquatic toxicity testing using the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Environ Toxicol Chem 9:1285–1290Google Scholar
  30. —, — (1990b) A promising indicator of neurobehavioral toxicity using the nematode Caenorhabditis elegans and computer tracking. Toxicol Ind Health 6:425–440Google Scholar
  31. Wood WB (1988) Introduction to C. elegans biology. In: Wood WB (ed) The nematode Caenorhabditis elegans. Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Cold Spring Harbor, NY, pp 1–16Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag New York Inc 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steven G. Donkin
    • 1
  • David B. Dusenbery
    • 1
  1. 1.School of BiologyGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations